Pratt Bridget, Merritt Maria, Hyder Adnan A
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, USA; Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics, USA; Nossal Institute of Global Health, University of Melbourne, Australia.
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, USA; Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics, USA.
Soc Sci Med. 2016 Feb;151:215-24. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.01.018. Epub 2016 Jan 13.
Growing consensus that health research funders should align their investments with national research priorities presupposes that such national priorities exist and are just. Arguably, justice requires national health research priority-setting to promote health equity. Such a position is consistent with recommendations made by the World Health Organization and at global ministerial summits that health research should serve to reduce health inequalities between and within countries. Thus far, no specific requirements for equity-oriented research priority-setting have been described to guide policymakers. As a step towards the explication and defence of such requirements, we propose that deep inclusion is a key procedural component of equity-oriented research priority-setting. We offer a model of deep inclusion that was developed by applying concepts from work on deliberative democracy and development ethics. This model consists of three dimensions--breadth, qualitative equality, and high-quality non-elite participation. Deep inclusion is captured not only by who is invited to join a decision-making process but also by how they are involved and by when non-elite stakeholders are involved. To clarify and illustrate the proposed dimensions, we use the sustained example of health systems research. We conclude by reviewing practical challenges to achieving deep inclusion. Despite the existence of barriers to implementation, our model can help policymakers and other stakeholders design more inclusive national health research priority-setting processes and assess these processes' depth of inclusion.
越来越多的人达成共识,即健康研究资助者应使其投资与国家研究重点保持一致,这一前提是存在此类国家重点且这些重点是公正的。可以说,正义要求国家健康研究重点的确定应促进健康公平。这一立场与世界卫生组织以及全球部长级峰会提出的建议一致,即健康研究应有助于减少国家之间和国家内部的健康不平等。到目前为止,尚未描述面向公平的研究重点确定的具体要求来指导政策制定者。作为朝着阐明和捍卫此类要求迈出的一步,我们提出深度包容是面向公平的研究重点确定的关键程序组成部分。我们提供了一个深度包容模型,该模型是通过应用审议民主和发展伦理方面的工作概念而开发的。这个模型由三个维度组成——广度、质量平等和高质量的非精英参与。深度包容不仅体现在邀请谁加入决策过程中,还体现在他们如何参与以及非精英利益相关者何时参与。为了阐明和说明所提出的维度,我们以卫生系统研究这个持续的例子为例。我们通过回顾实现深度包容的实际挑战来得出结论。尽管存在实施障碍,但我们的模型可以帮助政策制定者和其他利益相关者设计更具包容性的国家健康研究重点确定过程,并评估这些过程的包容深度。